Vivek Ramaswamy: Is There a Libertarian-Nationalist Alliance?

The former presidential candidate discusses the ideological tensions within the America First movement.

1x 1.1x 1.25x 1.5x 2x 3x

:15 :15

Download

Vivek Ramaswamy: Is There a Libertarian-Nationalist Alliance?

HD Video Download

Is the future of the GOP more libertarian, nationalist, or, somehow, both?

Joining us today is Vivek Ramaswamy, entrepreneur, author, and former presidential candidate. He's been making a hard pitch for what he's called a "libertarian-nationalist alliance" for the past several months. He was at the 2024 Libertarian National Convention where he tried to convince libertarians to vote Republican. Reason's Zach Weissmueller also saw Ramaswamy at the Republican National Convention, where he was trying to convince MAGA supporters to be more libertarian. Reason's Stephanie Slade saw him make his case for "national libertarianism" at the National Conservatism Conference. That event was also attended by vice presidential candidate J.D. Vance, who has a different vision for the conservative movement. Those dueling visions are the subject of today's episode.

Note: This episode is plagued by technical issues due to a software malfunction. With the exception of an approximately nine-minute section (which is marked in the episode), the full conversation is intact.

Watch the full conversation on Reason's YouTube channel or the Just Asking Questions podcast feed on Apple, Spotify, or your preferred podcatcher.

Sources referenced in this conversation:

1. Vivek Ramaswamy's full talk at the National Conservatism Conference
2. J.D. Vance's full talk at the National Conservatism Conference
3. "Vivek Ramaswamy Debuts 'National Libertarianism' at NatCon 4," by Stephanie Slade
4. Vivek Ramaswamy: Don't "replace the left-wing nanny state with a right-wing nanny state."
5. "What I Learned From Paleoism," by Llewellyn Rockwell

• Producer: John Osterhoudt

Comments

[Mother's Lament]

Because I bet $1 miilion dollars that Reason and the Jeff-Sarc-Shrike crew will try to conflate them, let’s first note the light years difference between the two unrelated concepts of Civic Nationalism and Ethnic Nationalism.

The first is unifying and the latter is dividing. But because civic nationalism weakens the attraction to global imperialism they will invariably try to smear it as ethnic nationalism because otherwise their arguments are abhorrent.

[SRG2]

I would say that often enough civic nationalism and ethnic nationalism lead to opposed outcomes.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

The first is unifying and the latter is dividing.

Now hold on. If civic nationalism is a type of ethos that unifies the citizens of a nation, then it must necessarily exclude all others. So civic nationalism and ethnic nationalism are both unifying and dividing in their own way, the only difference is how the in-group and out-group are defined.

[sarcasmic]

That's how I read it as well. Civic nationalism is akin to "love it or leave it" combined with a combination of contempt and hostility towards people from other countries. Ethnic nationalism doesn't apply to this country because it has no nationality.

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

Did Jen Psaki say this or something?

[Fire up the Woodchippers! (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

You should definitely get the fuck out Drunky. Take Fatfuck with you.

[SRG2]

Ethnic nationalism assuredly does apply to the US, but reserved specifically for white Americans. I think that much of Trump's base is driven by ethnic nationalism.

Civic nationalism on the other hand places culture and principles ahead of ethnicity and in the specific case of the US may actually be in direct conflict with it.

And while discrimination on grounds of ethnicity is invidious, discrimination on grounds of cultural differences - your concern about civic nationalism - may not be invidious at all, and may be beneficial/ FGM is one obvious example, honour killings another where we are entitled to look down on those cultural practices and have an idea of civic nationalism that rejects them.

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

Damn. Another retarded leftist narrative from classical liberal shrike. Lol.

[SRG2]

#3

[5.56]

Are you one of those perpetually whiny blacks or something?

[RothBot]

Civic nationalism does not entail "love it or leave it", unless by that vacuous slogan you mean that inclusion in the community depends on acceptance of some social compact or terms of service. Terms of service often leave room for a great deal of diversity, pluralism, and disagreement. In the United States, the terms of service (social compact) are codified in the Constitution. The Constitution, like any founding document, is not self-interpreting, as we all know, and thus admits of a plurality of meanings and interpretations. Is conditioning inclusion in the community on a commitment to the non-aggression principle "Love it or Leave it"? Yes, in the sense that the Constitution is a contract of adhesion (take it or leave it), but I argue not in the sense your comment implies since the constitution is so broad, by design, that it admits of a great deal of plurality. I do think authoritarianism violates the U.S. social compact such that a commitment to authoritarianism runs afoul of our broad, shared civic identity. A constitution that simply codifies the non-aggression principle would be even more inclusive.

Yes, ultimately any meaningful (non-empty) collective identity will exclude some people, e.g., authoritarians.

[Mother's Lament]

Ha ha, nice try, and it's just what we expected from you.

[sarcasmic]

He’s right. Civic nationalism defines the in-group as citizens and the out-group as people from other nations, while ethnic nationalism devines the in-group as the ruling ethnicity and the out-group as all others.

[sarcasmic]

*defines*

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

Hold up. You mean the world has multiple nations???

[Fire up the Woodchippers! (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

Sarc and Jeffy have no concept of citizenship. This country means nothing to them, and is just a mechanism to be twisted their global neo Marxist ends.

Vermin like Sarc and Jeffy should be expunged from our country.

[VULGAR MADMAN]

Liberalism, free markets and fee speech all originated in western countries. You are so stupid though that you think people who don’t like those things, will embrace those ideas when they touch western soil.

[VULGAR MADMAN]

I meant “free” speech in case sarcasmic is confused.

[Mother's Lament]

Oh sarcasmic is definitely confused but also doesn't give a shit because he's here to troll and occasionally white knight for Jeffy.

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

He is already contradicting himself from his need to defend jeff yesterday below.

[defaultdotxbe]

I agree, seems like the only difference is in how one defines the "nation"

[But SkyNet is a Private Company]

Me: Nationalism = Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Churchill, Bolivar, Gandhi, DeGaulle, Ben Gurion, Meir, Bismarck, Nasser

Jeffsarc: Nationalism = Hitler

[Mother's Lament]

Other me... nationalism /= not Irish or Jamaican or descendants of slaves that were born in Jamaica that have a single Irish ancestor that I can claim is 80% of their ancestry. I'm going to die on this hill that Donald Harris' black ass is actually a honky.
The trump campaign is going to go hard on the "Kamala is actually a slave trader" meme!

Coming in hot!!!!!!

[Mother's Lament]

I gave you extensive links. You gave us nothing but your ActBlue talking points. Rage harder, pedo.

[MasterThief]

My concept of nationalism is basically just an extension of patriotism. You care about your nation and advocate for a government that serves its people and allows them to flourish. It is militaristic only in the sense that the people defend themselves and their interests (yes, I understand where that can run afoul). It seems the concept is being intentionally conflated with national socialism. It isn't the focus on one's own nation that is the problem. The problem is the socialism and expansionism. Germany wasn't a problem because there was a rising patriotism and desire to build the nation into the best in the world. It was a problem because they violated the NAP against their own population and further against neighboring nations

[Chipper Chunked Chile Con Congress (ex NCW)]

Yeah, I don't see a whole huge amount of tension between the concepts, myself.

[sarcasmic]

I'm seeing nationalism within the GOP becoming protectionism, industrial policy, and economic isolationism. All of these things are bad economics. It's been proven over and over starting with Adam Smith over two centuries ago.

[VULGAR MADMAN]

Our resident retard doesn’t know America has had tariffs, and a reluctance to get involved in other countries business since the beginning. He’s the real libertarian though.

[SRG2]

a reluctance to get involved in other countries business since the beginning.

LOL. Do you know anything about US history? The US has been reluctant to intervene when two other countries or alliances conflict, perhaps, but has been quite willing to get involved all over the globe for its own interests regardless of whether that involved other countries' businesses.

[5.56]

Got you so angry that you even messed up the formatting, whiny?

[sarcasmic]

And that's why the Democrats are usually better, as bad as they are.

[But SkyNet is a Private Company]

THERE IT IS: Go Team D! He finally admits to it.

(The Democrats are better on absolutely nothing at all)

[sarcasmic]

That’s an impersonator. Muting him does not mute me.

Democrats have traditionally been much worse than Republicans on trade and economics. What we've seen since Trump took over the GOP is a hard left turn with regards to trade and economics. Before long the two parties will be distinguished from each other not in principle, but in who they subsidize and who's products they punitively tax.

[VULGAR MADMAN]

If you weren’t so insanely stupid, you’d realize that Trump is basically an 80s liberal.

[Fire up the Woodchippers! (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

He’s not just stupid. He’s consistently drunk too.

[DesigNate]

Even if you grant all that about Trump and the GOP, the Democrats are somehow STILL worse on economic policy.

[InsaneTrollLogic (Factio Democratica delenda est 5/30/24)]

Ok, Tulpa.

[Chipper Chunked Chile Con Congress (ex NCW)]

Someone is trolling y'all but good.

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

Proper parody requires understanding the subject, and this one has sarc nailed.

[Minadin]

That's fine, but it's still as much of a BS move to mimic sarc's handle as it is for the idiot who is doing Mother's Lament's.

[DesigNate]

I think it’s the same asshole.

[InsaneTrollLogic (Factio Democratica delenda est 5/30/24)]

Different IP address as I have the ML mimicker muted.

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

https://www.adamsmith.org/blog/politics-government/is-nationalism-a-force-for-good-yes

What you actually believe is that anyone in the world who has no claim on a country can come and take from said country without contribution. Not required to adopt the country they take from but relishing in their benefits without contribution.

This idea you and Jeff spread is closer to marxism.

[sarcasmic]

Whenever Jesse says “What you actually believe…” whatever follows is a strawman from hell.

[VULGAR MADMAN]

So says the strawman manufacturer extraordinaire.

[Mother's Lament]

Sarc is literally the nation's finest strawman master craftsman. If this were Japan he'd have Living National Treasure status.

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

I mean we have your history of posts. I've shown how your views align with the marxist views of open borders dozens of times.

[Mother's Lament]

Include our genealogy reports for your form of nationalism, shitbird.

[Mother's Lament]

Fuck off, Buttplug. Go starch your cone and bleach your robe, you angry sockpuppeting Klansman.

[Mother's Lament]

Eat shit other me.

[Mother's Lament]

You're never going to be me. I’m like the only one who doesn’t have you on mute at this point and that’s only because I like telling you to go fuck yourself.

[sarcasmic]

I don't have either of you on mute because I think it's hilarious to see you being impersonated after years of claiming I ran the sock that impersonated me. Too fucking funny. This is justice in my view.

[Mother's Lament]

You ran a sock impersonating me too, for a whole week, you drunken cocksmuggler, and I have the links to prove it.

This type of assholery is prime Democratic party poster shenanigans.

[sarcasmic]

So? It's still hilarious to see you all hurt and offended. Makes me smile. Doesn't quite make up for you lying for months, or perhaps a whole year, after accidentally proving that I was being socked. But it's a start.

[Mother's Lament]

You were never socked, you lying drunk. You can't even remember some of the shit you posted in the same thread.

But I do remember you making bullshit posts like this hypocritical lie:

sarcasmic 6 hours ago
Flag Comment Mute User
Yeah, I don’t like being impersonated. I know you don’t care because you have no honor or integrity, but I do.
https://reason.com/2023/08/22/u-s-emulates-communist-china-in-new-tiktok-draft-agreement/?comments=true#comment-10207583

[Mother's Lament]

Or this:

”sarcasmic 5 hours ago
Flag Comment Mute User
Thought there’s be at least a handful of people who don’t approve of liars pretending to be other people.
Boy was I wrong.
https://reason.com/2023/08/22/u-s-emulates-communist-china-in-new-tiktok-draft-agreement/?comments=true#comment-10207655

You really are just lying, posturing trash, aren’t you Sarckles?

[sarcasmic]

*tosses a bag of popcorn into the microwave*

[VULGAR MADMAN]

*forgets how to turn the microwave on, because he’s drunk.*

[Mother's Lament]

*ends up chewing the kernels raw and cracks a tooth. Blames Jesse*

[Fire up the Woodchippers! (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

You have neither of those things. You’re a homeless drunk living in a piss soaked alley.

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

He finally admitted it? Bookmark for sure.

[Mother's Lament]

Don't worry. Tomorrow the drunken moron will swear that it was Tulpa again.

[Jefferson Paul]

"So. It's okay because ML did it first."

From the guy who mocks everyone who's not a Dem by saying sarcastically, "It's okay because Democrats did it first."

[Mother's Lament]

Whatever you say Ontario.

[Mother's Lament]

Ontario? WTF.

[Mother's Lament]

Nobody wants to be you.

You're just the worst of the worst that did the banana republic thing. Now you have to share.

Suck it trump fag.

[Mother's Lament]

So this is your angry little Biden Guy revenge for me criticizing your Nazi judge shitting on the constitution?

What a desperate joke you are.

[VULGAR MADMAN]

“Shoot us both Spock!”

[Mother's Lament]

I'll take the weekend off like always and you'll be here like the pathetic obsessive you are.

I'd love to meet you in person and give you the treatment people like you used to get.

[sarcasmic]

I'd pay money to see that.

[VULGAR MADMAN]

He means you’re a circus geek.

[Mother's Lament]

Sarcasmic would pay to see a lot of demented shit:

sarcasmic 10 hours ago
Flag Comment Mute User
Screw being humane. Whip out a machete and swipe off the head, then laugh as it runs around with blood squirting up into the air before landing on the heads of screaming children. I’d register to vote for that guy.

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

Don't spend that welfare all in one place.

[Fire up the Woodchippers! (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

I really wish that drunken fuck followed through on his threats against me. I would have had a legal pretext to savagely beat him. Which I’m sure the cowardly little pussy knows.

[Mother's Lament]

I’d love to meet you in person and give you the treatment people like you used to get.

Are you suddenly threatening to be internet tough guy because I make you feel dumb on the internet? What a fucking joke you are.

You harass the Mormons here and dox their widows, and troll, and sockpuppet, and then try to sound smart and pontificate with a concept of world history learned from superhero movie tropes and your career as a grocery clerk, but when someone punches back you freak out and act like you were innocent and never deserved it.
Sniveling little rainbow sex cult fetishist troll, bragging about your omnisexuality like it means anything other than you're a pervert.

Fuck you. You thought I was being mean to you before? Well hang the fuck on because I'm going to kick it up to eleven.

[KARtikeya]

I’m not the one impersonating you. I do find it funny though.

“and then try to sound smart and pontificate with a concept of world history learned from superhero movie tropes”

At least I don’t repeat the same old discredited Dinesh D’Souza talking points over and over.

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

Globalism and libertarianism does not work. One rule for everyone is not libertarian.

I know the left is desperate to make nationalism a dirty word, but you dont always have to follow the narratives.

[SRG2]

Well, the axiomatic form of libertarianism seems essentially unimplentable. Why don't you specify what you mean by "globalism"? Lowering trade barriers and allowing the free movement of capital are generally regarded as globalist ideas but are by and large good, while "one world government" is also called globalism and is almost certainly a bad goal.

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

Shrike, we've had this discussion. Globalism of centralized control of trade is not libertarian. Your redefining this system into an adjective description of free markets doesn't change the behaviors we see from groups you openly support. Those large regional "free trade" bills you support are not actually free trade. They are agreed to trade conditions, export/import controls at a large scale.

[SRG2]

#1

we’ve had this discussion

Possibly, but you’d have lost because you’re confusing two things that I pointed out were different, a one-world-government model, which paranoid loons and antisemites (some overlap) seem to think already exists, and which I said is bad, and globalisation “Lowering trade barriers and allowing the free movement of capital” which are generally good, though people in uncompetitive industries who lose their jobs might disagree.

Free trade agreements may not be perfect free trade but they typically result in freer trade than before.

[DesigNate]

Globalization isn’t globalism. Nobody, not even the mega-protectionist/mercantilist, want 0 international trade (okay, maybe there are some complete isolationist out there, but they shouldn’t be taken seriously).

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

No. What you're doing is the same thing as all leftist, a butchered no true Scotsman fallacy based on ignorance. The left relies on denial and lies about their stances which you clearly are attempting to do. You dont live in reality because reality has shown a repeated failure for your views.

[SRG2]

#4

And you've shown yourself to be a far-right lying POS who would scream that 2+2=5 if anyone you deemed a leftist said it was 4.

And only a dishonest poster would describe as a leftist someone who has consistently advocated for capitalism and against socialism, while whingeing, with the hypocrisy typical of the breed, that others are lying about their stances.

Question: when has capitalism been shown to fail, and economic isolationism or socialism been shown to succeed?

As I've said before, far-right scum like yourself call "leftism" everything you disagree with. Quel fuckwit.

[SRG2]

On reflection I suspect that the reason you prefer the one-world definition of globalism is you like to think of yourself as a libertarian but you also don't want foreigners stealing our jobs and US industries having to compete on a relatively level playing field if it means being out-competed, and don't want American capital leaving, and an obvious way to rationalise the disconnect is to redefine the terms.

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

So on reflection you thought of every leftist trope you could?

It id amazing how all you not a leftists start screaming identarian arguments the moment your arguments are shown to be failed.

[SRG2]

How is being pro-capitalist and anti-socialist “leftist”, you ignorant buffoon?

[Zeb]

I want someone to define "nationalism" so I know what we are talking about here. Maybe "libertarianism" too. I'm pretty firm on what I think it means, but who knows what everyone else is talking about.
I would say that in the ideal, libertarianism should be universal. But we are really far from that ideal. I used to be a lot more doctrinaire, cynical libertarian hardliner. But I've come to accept that practical compromises are sometimes needed if we actually want to move anything in a more libertarian direction in this country. And that culture matters.

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

Libertarianism should be universal, but it should move as much power towards the individual as possible. Globalism is a means to pull power away from the individual to a single entity over billions of people.

Nationalism in this case is more akin to federalist principles. It is a step down from globalism. The power should still continue to be pulled down to states and localities and not the federal level.

The fact is cultures and countries do act differently. Some cultures support socialist principles and that is the choice of their culture others do not.

Nationalism allows people to formulate the best fit to their culture. It refers back to the old idiom that states and cities are the test tubes of democracy that was prevelant a hundred years ago.

The myth that a globalist entity will be more free remains a myth. One only has to look at the UN, WEF, or other large multinational political groups.

[Bill Dalasio]

Nationalism is a rough practical substitute for power delegated down to the local community and the individuals acting within that community. There's a libertarian critique of nationalism to be made. But, it's nearly the exact opposite of the critique offered up by the managerial technocracy and its supporters within libertarianism.

[Mother's Lament]

You mean that you've been bullied by the reason trump libertarians?

It's ok. We will be here for you after the "red wave".

[Mother's Lament]

Fuck off, Buttplug, you sockpuppeting racist piece of shit.

[IceTrey]

Libertarianism is the knowledge that coercion is immoral.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

One rule for everyone is not libertarian.

"Don't violate the NAP" is not libertarian?

[Bill Dalasio]

In practical terms, outside of a shared cultural context, no. It inevitably means imposing a definition of aggression that is not universally shared.

[sarcasmic]

Aggression is not hard to define. In the libertarian context it means using force or fraud to harm the life, liberty or property of others.

The only time I see that definition disputed is when someone thinks it's ok to use force or fraud to get their preferred outcome.

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

Just yesterday you were trying to claim corporations can't initiate force even when they are influenced by government. That is aggression and you hand waived it away. Lol.

[sarcasmic]

I’m not interested in you making arguments against deliberate misinterpretations of what I said in the past, or putting words into my mouth to argue against. If you want to respond to what I just said, like a human being instead of some shrill animal, please do. But otherwise please go fuck yourself and let me have conversations with people who aren’t complete cunts.

[VULGAR MADMAN]

Look at Socrates over here with his big ideas!

[Mother's Lament]

"putting words into my mouth"

If you weren't such a perma-drunk liquorpig you'd realize that you're the one who put those words in your mouth.

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

Do I really need to link to yesterday’s roundup? Do you have that much alcoholics amnesia? Cause I’m willing to. It was the thread you were crying about ML finding links of Jeff’s past statements after jeff demanded them. Remember drunky?

[Fire up the Woodchippers! (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

I’m not interest in you existing. So why don’t you correct that situation. End your suffering.

[Bill Dalasio]

Yeah, even in the shared cultural context, sarcasmic pushes for a fundamentally different definition.

[Bill Dalasio]

And that's just pushing off the question. Because then you're stuck defining force and fraud in a universal way.

[sarcasmic]

Instead of making this about me, try explaining what you mean when you say force and fraud don't have universal definitions. Try persuasion instead of attacks. You know, don't be a Jesse.

[Mother's Lament]

He didn't make it about you, you desperate, evasive asshole. He pointed out your little trick, and now I'm pointing out another.

[sarcasmic]

No, you're gaslighting.

[Mother's Lament]

"NO U!!!1!"

You still don't know what gaslighting is I see, drunky.

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

That word was already on theist of words you dont know.

Try again.

[Bill Dalasio]

I'm not making this about you. I'm pointing out that your answer isn't really as meaningful as you suggest. If you can't define force and fraud such that it will be universally agreed to, you're not going to be able to impose the NAP by universal consent.

But, I'll satisfy your question.

In some cultures, posing as a member of another tribe would be considered fraud. Or posing as a member of the opposite sex. Others don't consider either fraud. Which do you adopt?

Some cultures consider physically disciplining children force. Others consider corporal punishment just a natural part of parenting. Which do you tell people not to violate?

[sarcasmic]

In some cultures, posing as a member of another tribe would be considered fraud. Or posing as a member of the opposite sex. Others don’t consider either fraud. Which do you adopt?

Can you give some specific examples? Because I highly doubt that any culture says it’s ok to use deception for personal gain at the expense of others. It's human nature to see that as wrong. My guess is that the cultures that do not consider posing as a member of another tribe to be fraud don’t have anything to lose from someone doing so, while the ones that do do.

Some cultures consider physically disciplining children force. Others consider corporal punishment just a natural part of parenting. Which do you tell people not to violate?

It is force. Question is whether or not it is justified, and people are divided by that even in this country let alone between different cultures. That’s like getting people to agree on abortion.

[Bill Dalasio]

I just gave you direct examples. If you don't want people making it about you, argue in good faith rather than moving the goal posts.

[sarcasmic]

You said that some tribes view impersonators as fraudsters while others do not. You’re not giving enough information or context. Fraud isn’t mere deception. It’s deception for personal gain at the expense of others. Are you arguing that it’s just deception? Are you arguing that some cultures don’t mind if someone lies to people for personal gain? I am arguing in good faith here. I'm not assuming you have bad intentions. I'd appreciate it if you did the same.

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

Middle Eastern cultures have no problem using fraud as a tactic dumdum. They even have a word for it.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/taqiyyah

How fucking ignorant are you?

Then there are Romanis and gypsies that freely practice it.

You dont have to live your life in ignorance dumdum.

Mongols and vikings practiced force and might makes right for centuries.

Your entire belief system appears built on utter ignorance.

[Mother's Lament]

You stupid faggot.

Fraud is the term that everyone wants to redefine and you know it.

Other me will be along shortly to assure everyone that you're the only person that hasn't accepted the new definition.

[sarcasmic]

Is that the new tactic? Claim my definition is wrong while not explaining why or giving any other definitions? Looks like a bunch of bullshit gaslighting to me.

[Mother's Lament]

It’s your retarded friend Buttplug, trying to trick people by socking as me. Use the mute button to check. No hairspaces needed.

[sarcasmic]

I can't tell which is which.

[Mother's Lament]

The mute button works just fine to tell. You're a proud Muter, you should know that.

[sarcasmic]

What part of I'm enjoying this do you not understand?

[Mother's Lament]

Lol

sarcasmic 6 hours ago
Flag Comment Mute User
Yeah, I don’t like being impersonated. I know you don’t care because you have no honor or integrity, but I do.

sarcasmic 5 hours ago
Flag Comment Mute User
Thought there’s be at least a handful of people who don’t approve of liars pretending to be other people.
Boy was I wrong.

Not even five hours after posting this you were socking as me.

[sarcasmic]

That was the thread where someone impersonated me and one of you had an orgasm. Not sure which.

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

I love when sarc triples down on being a hypocrite.

[Mother's Lament]

“That was the thread where someone impersonated me”

And then immediately after and in the same thread you decided it was fun and impersonated me. Hypocrite isn’t really a strong enough word for what you are. Ultrahypocrite? Megahypocrite?

[Mother's Lament]

He's full of shit, remember mothers lament original flavor? That's because I stole the handle fair and square.

He just admitted to how he impersonated his own nick.

He's a retarded disingenuous piece of shit.

[Mother's Lament]

He’s full of shit, remember mothers lament original flavor? That’s because I stole the handle fair and square.

How the fuck is it stealing “fair and square” you retarded fuck? There hasn’t been secure handles for two years now. Anyone can assume anyone else’s nick anytime they want.

Most don’t because they aren’t pieces of shit like you.

[Mother's Lament]

Lol, I stole your name when you had the posturing banana republic shit. But thanks for telling everyone else how to steal handles.

[Mother's Lament]

You didn't "steal" anything. Nicks haven't been secure for years now. People don't take others because unlike you they aren't pieces of shit.

Nice to see that that calling your Nazi judge's banana republic ruling made your ass sore though. I'll be sure to kick that up in the future.

[Mother's Lament]

For fucks sake. Buttplug is the only moron on here worse than squirrel and Kirkland.

I just personally hate you.

You stupid Canadian faggot.

[Mother's Lament]

You realize I actually don't give a shit about which one of you demented fucks you are. The likeliest choice is the fuck behind KAR/DOL/Encog/BidenGuy, but I'm just fine with blaming the Pedo and Lying Jeffy instead.

Pleased as punch that trash like you hates me though, and I'll be doing my best to make you shit yourself with rage daily.

[GroundTruth]

If the one rule is "mind your own business", it works.

[IceTrey]

Coercion is prohibited.

[Bill Dalasio]

I like a lot of what he has to say. But, I do think he's off base in focusing so strictly on the ideals of 1776, per se. No, I'm not advocating for blood and soil. But, the truth is that the patriots of 1776 weren't even strictly fighting for the ideals in the abstract. That would be more akin to the French Revolution. The American Revolutionaries were explicitly tying their cause to what they viewed as their historic rights, at least initially, as Englishmen. They saw George as usurping those rights. So, as much as I can't accept blood and soil, I also don't buy into ideals in a jar. I think my best alternative is history. That is to say, that being an American isn't just sharing a set of ideals, as much as it is buying into becoming part of the larger history, the larger narrative, of the nation shaped by those ideals.

[tracerv]

Anyone want to bet that dude from Algeria wins the Women's boxing gold in Paris? Bet the odds of him losing are the same as finding Bigfoot.

[sarcasmic]

This French Farce makes Paris 2024 the worst Olympics in my lifetime! KENNEDY slams the pedo rapists, gender madness, sewer swims and genital-flashing drag queens

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13695319/transgender-Olympics-Paris-Imane-Khelif-KENNEDY.html

I’m with Kennedy on this one. Not that I’m a big fan of the Games anyway, but I’m sooooo not interested in them now.

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

Weird. When someone points out Chase supports medical transitioning kids you lose your shit.

[Chipper Chunked Chile Con Congress (ex NCW)]

Enh. Might be the dude from Taiwan instead.

[sarcasmic]

Moved reply to tracerv.

[Mother's Lament]

I need to register as a foreign agent.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

At the very least, you should be paying US taxes on the 50-centing income that you get from the Trump campaign.

[sarcasmic]

If so it's money wasted, since he only entertains a half a dozen fellow morons.

[VULGAR MADMAN]

I love it when you retards tell on yourselves.

[VULGAR MADMAN]

Project away!

[Mother's Lament]

Jeff knows it isn't me, which is why he's playing along instead of sperging out.

[Fire up the Woodchippers! (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

No Fatfuck, only you leftists do that. Now why don’t you back to moderating your NAMBlA chat group?

[Uomo Del Ghiaccio]

The Republican party has two personalities. One which is part of the uni-party that joins with the worst portion of the Democrat party. The other is the populist portion which has some commonalities with two portions of the Democrat party albeit with a difference of opinion on the solution.

I agree with Vivek Ramaswamy that there is an opportunity for libertarians to influence the populist portion of the Republican party. Populism as well as liberalism (as in the US political sort) tend to react emotionally versus taking a step back and reacting more logically.

Often we hear something akin to "we have to do something" in response to a law that quite simply is either a dog-pile on an existing law or one that is so laughable it's amazing that it is even associated with the issue at hand.

The opportunity is to use the energy of the populism, but slow down the reaction with logical dialog and discussion.

I also agree with Vivek Ramaswamy that we don't want to replace the authoritarianism of the current uni-party with a different brand of authoritarianism. It is a difficult prospect, but it's the only play for libertarians. Even the notion of a collapse to reset is more dangerous because who gains control afterward is most probably going to be worse.

[STMitchell]

This was an extraordinary program: congratulations to Liz and Zach. If Ramaswamy adheres to these ideals through the coming years, he certainly has my vote.

[It's only a paper moon, Nominalists]

This will all be lost on the common person. Vermeule, Deneen, the various "common good' arguers will convince nobody. We need to either revitalize the principles of our Founding or repudiate them or modify them. But we don't need talking heads inventing words and taking the results of the strivings of all those Founders and tossing them on the basis of their one personal opinion. And that is all it is. --And, yes, same with me !!!